RUP CHAND Vs. HARI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a tenant's petition against whom an ejectment application was dismissed by the Rent Controller but an eviction order was passed in appeal.

(2.) THE landlord Hari Chand sought ejectment of his tenant Rup Chand from the shop in dispute, inter alia, on the ground that the building has become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and he wanted to reconstruct the same. The tenant denied the said allegations in the written statement. Learned Rent Controller found that there is nothing in this building which suggested that it is in a dilapidated condition. So according to the inspection report of the learned Rent Controller, he did not find that the building in dilapidated condition and hence unfit and unsafe for human habitation. Consequently, the ejectment application was dismissed. In appeal, the learned Appellate Authority thought it expedient that some Local Commissioner should be appointed to examine the condition of the shop a new and to make report whether it had really become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. Thus, a high ranking officer of the Public Works Department, Shri P.L. Dhawan, Executive Engineer (Construction Division) B&R, Bhatinda was appointed as a Local Commissioner by mutual consent of the parties on 15.5.1979. The said Local Commissioner visited the premises on 18.5.1979 in the presence of the parties and made his report Exhibit C-1 to the effect that whereas the front room marked A in the plan appended to his report was structurally safe, the general condition of the middle room marked as B by him was not satisfactory since some of the batons in the room had been eaten away and the room was unsafe. The third room marked C was declared by him to be unsafe and unfit for human habitation. It was also been found by the learned Appellate Authority during the pendency of the appeal, a part of the roof of the back room fell down though according to Rup Chand tenant, it had happened due to to certain acts of mischief committed by the landlords whereas according to the landlord, the roof had fallen due to structural deterioration of the building, which had become unsafe. Thus, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the report of the Local Commissioner, it was concluded that the middle room as well as the hind most room have certainly become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and, therefore, the tenant was liable to ejectment. Dissatisfied with the same, the tenant has filed this petition in this Court.

(3.) HOWEVER , the tenant is allowed three months time to vacate the premises provided all the arrears of rent, if any, are deposited with the Rent Controller, within one month, from today with the further undertaking in writing that after expiry of the said period of the vacant possession will be handed over to the landlord and the rent for the said period will be paid in advance by 10th of every month. Petition dismissed.